The  price  of  this  book  (HspeM^mc 

GArRilT^F-)  IS  $ _ _  .  ORDERS 

LEFT  WITH  “ORDER  CLERK"  WILL  BE  GIVEN 
PROMPT  ATTENTION  AND  THE  BOOK  WILL 

BE  FORWARDED  AT  THE  CLOSE  OF  THE 
CONVENTION. 


Contributions  to  Education 

Number  V 


THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CHICAGO 

FOUNDED  BY  JOHN  D.  ROCKEFELLER 


CONTRIBUTIONS  TO  EDUCATION 

Number  V 


The  Child 
AND  THE  Curriculum 


BY 

JOHN  DEWEY 


SOMETIME  PROFESSOR  AND  HEAD  OF  THE  DEPARTMENT  OF  PHILOSOPHY 
AND  DIRECTOR  OF  THE  SCHOOL  OF  EDUCATION  IN 
THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CHICAGO 
PROFESSOR  OF  PHILOSOPHY  IN  COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY 


CHICAGO 

THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CHICAGO  PRESS 

1909 


LIBRARY  Cr  THE 

STUDENT  VOL'JHTLER  MOVEMENT  FOR  FORETN  mZZlO'iS- 
COO  Lexington  Avenue,  New  Vobx  City. 


Copyright  1902  By 
The  University  of  Chicago 


Published  September  1902 
Second  Impression  February  1905 
Third  Impression  July  1906 
Fourth  Impression  January  1908 
Fifth  Impression  September  1909 


Composed  and  Printed  By 
The  University  of  Chicago  Press 
Chicago,  Illinois,  U.  S.  A. 


The  Child  and  the  Curriculum 


I 

-  s 


f;<fC  < 

I  •: 

-  V 


Digitized  by  the  internet  Archive 
in  2019  with  funding  from 
Columbia  University  Libraries 


https://archive.org/details/childcurriculumOOdewe_0 


THE  CHILD  AND  THE  CUR¬ 
RICULUM. 


Profound  differences  in  theory  are  never 
gratuitous  or  invented.  They  grow  out  of  con¬ 
flicting  elements  in  a  genuine  problem  —  a 
problem  which  is  genuine  just  because  the 
elements,  taken  as  they  stand,  are  conflicting. 
Any  significant  problem  involves  conditions 
that  for  the  moment  contradict  each  other. 
Solution  comes  only  by  getting  away  from  the 
meaning  of  terms  that  is  already  fixed  upon 
and  coming  to  see  the  conditions  from  another 
point  of  view,  and  hence  in  a  fresh  light.  But 
this  reconstruction  means  travail  of  thought. 
Easier  than  thinking  with  surrender  of  already 
formed  ideas  and  detachment  from  facts  al¬ 
ready  learned,  is  just  to  stick  by  what  is  already 
said,  looking  about  for  something  with  which 
to  buttress  it  against  attack. 

Thus  sects  arise  ;  schools  of  opinion.  Each 
selects  that  set  of  conditions  that  appeal  to  it ; 
and  then  erects  them  into  a  complete  and  inde¬ 
pendent  truth,  instead  of  treating  them  as  a 
factor  in  a  problem,  needing  adjustment. 

The  fundamental  factors  in  the  educative 


7 


8 


The  Child  and  the  Curficulum 


process  are  an  immature,  undeveloped  being  ; 
and  certain  social  aims,  meanings,  values  incar¬ 
nate  in  the  matured  experience  of  the  adult. 
The  educative  process  is  the  due  interaction 
of  these  forces.  Such  a  conception  of  each 
in  relation  to  the  other  as  facilitates  completest 
and  freest  interaction  is  the  essence  of  educa¬ 
tional  theory. 

But  here  comes  the  effort  of  thought.  It  is 
easier  to  see  the  conditions  in  their  separate¬ 
ness,  to  insist  upon  one  at  the  expense  of 
the  other,  to  make  antagonists  of  them,  than 
to  discover  a  reality  to  which  each  belongs. 
The  easy  thing  is  to  seize  upon  something  in 
the  nature  of  the  child,  or  upon  something  in 
the  developed  consciousness  of  the  adult,  and 
insist  upon  that  as  the  key  to  the  whole  prob¬ 
lem.  When  this  happens  a  really  serious  prac¬ 
tical  problem  —  that  of  interaction — is  trans¬ 
formed  into  an  unreal,  and  hence  insoluble, 
theoretic  problem.  Instead  of  seeing  the  edu¬ 
cative  steadily  and  as  a  whole,  we  see  conflict¬ 
ing  terms.  We  get  the  case  of  the  child  vs. 
the  curriculum  ;  of  the  individual  nature  vs. 
social  culture.  Below  all  other  divisions  in 
pedagogic  opinion  lies  this  opposition. 

The  child  lives  in  a  somewhat  narrow  world 
of  personal  contacts.  Things  hardly  come 
within  his  experience  unless  they  touch,  inti- 


The  Child  and  the  Curriculum 


9 


mately  and  obviously,  his  own  well-being,  or 
that  of  his  family  and  friends.  His  world  is  a 
world  of  persons  with  their  personal  interests, 
rather  than  a  realm  of  facts  and  laws.  Not 
truth,  in  the  sense  of  conformity  to  external  fact, 
but  affection  and  sympathy,  is  its  keynote.  As 
against  this,  the  course  of  study  met  in  the 
school  presents  material  stretching  back  indefi¬ 
nitely  in  time,  and  extending  outward  indefi¬ 
nitely  into  space.  The  child  is  taken  out  of  his 
familiar  physical  environment,  hardly  more  than 
a  square  mile  or  so  in  area,  into  the  wide  world 
—  yes,  and  even  to  the  bounds  of  the  solar 
system.  His  little  span  of  personal  memory 
and  tradition  is  overlaid  with  the  long  centuries 
of  the  history  of  all  peoples. 

Again,  the  child’s  life  is  an  integral,  a  total 
one.  He  passes  quickly  and  readily  from  one 
topic  to  another,  as  from  one  spot  to  another, 
but  is  not  conscious  of  transition  or  break. 
There  is  no  conscious  isolation,  hardly  con¬ 
scious  distinction.  The  things  that  occupy 
him  are  held  together  by  the  unity  of  the  per¬ 
sonal  and  social  interests  which  his  life  carries 
along.  Whatever  is  uppermost  in  his  mind 
constitutes  to  him,  for  the  time  being,  the 
whole  universe.  That  universe  is  fluid  and 
fluent ;  its  contents  dissolve  and  re-form  with 
amazing  rapidity.  But,  after  all,  it  is  the  child’s 


lO 


The  Child  and  the  Curriculum 


own  world.  It  has  the  unity  and  complete¬ 
ness  of  his  own  life.  He  goes  to  school,  and 
various  studies  divide  and  fractionize  the  world 
for  him.  Geography  selects,  it  abstracts  and 
analyzes  one  set  of  facts,  and  from  one  particu¬ 
lar  point  of  view.  Arithmetic  is  anotiier  divi¬ 
sion,  grammar  another  department,  and  so  on 
indefinitely. 

Again,  in  school  each  of  these  subjects  is 
classified.  Facts  are  torn  away  from  their 
original  place  in  experience  and  rearranged 
with  reference  to  some  general  principle.  Clas¬ 
sification  is  not  a  matter  of  child  experience ; 
things  do  not  come  to  the  individual  pigeon¬ 
holed.  The  vital  ties  of  affection,  the  connect- 
ing  bonds  of  activity,  hold  together  the  variety 
of  his  personal  experiences.  The  adult  mind 
is  so  familiar  with  the  notion  'of  logically 
ordered  facts  that  it  does  not  recognize  —  it 
cannot  realize — the  amount  of  separating  and 
reformulating  which  the  facts  of  direct  experi¬ 
ence  have  to  undergo  before  they  can  appear 
as  a  “study,”  or  branch  of  learning.  A  prin¬ 
ciple,  for  the  intellect,  has  had  to  be  dis¬ 
tinguished  and  defined  ;  facts  have  had  to 
be  interpreted  in  relation  to  this  principle, 
not  as  they  are  in  themselves.  They  have 
had  to  be  regathered  about  a  new  center 
which  is  wholly  abstract  and  ideal.  All  this 


The  Child  and  the  Cufficttinm 


1 1 


means  a  development  of  a  special  intellectual 
interest.  It  means  ability  to  view  facts  impar¬ 
tially  and  objectively;  that  is,  without  refer¬ 
ence  to  their  place  and  meaning  in  one’s  own 
experience.  It  means  capacity  to  analyze  and 
to  synthesize.  It  means  highly  matured  intel¬ 
lectual  habits  and  the  command  of  a  definite 
technique  and  apparatus  of  scientific  inquiry. 
The  studies  as  classified  are  the  product,  in  a 
word,  of  the  science  of  the  ages,  not  of  the 
experience  of  the  child. 

These  apparent  deviations  and  differences 
between  child  and  curriculum  might  be  almost 
indefinitely  widened.  But  we  have  here  suffi¬ 
ciently  fundamental  divergences :  first,  the 
narrow  but  personal  world  of  the  child  against 
the  impersonal  but  infinitely  extended  world 
of  space  and  time;  second,  the  unity,  the 
single  whole-heartedness  of  the  child’s  life, 
and  the  specializations  and  divisions  of  the 
curriculum ;  third,  an  abstract  principle  of 
logical  classification  and  arrangement,  and  the 
practical  and  emotional  bonds  of  child  life. 

From  these  elements  of  conflict  grow  up 
different  educational  sects.  One  school  fixes 
its  attention  upon  the  importance  of  the  sub¬ 
ject-matter  of  the  curriculum  as  compared 
with  the  contents  of  the  child’s  own  expe¬ 
rience.  It  is  as  if  they  said  :  Is  life  petty, 


12 


The  Child  and  the  Curriculnm 


narrow,  and  crude  ?  Then  studies  reveal  the 
great,  wide  universe  with  all  its  fulness  and 
complexity  of  meaning.  Is  the  life  of  the 
child  egoistic,  self-centered,  impulsive?  Then 
in  these  studies  is  found  an  objective  universe 
of  truth,  law,  and  order.  Is  his  experience 
confused,  vague,  uncertain,  at  the  mercy  of  the 
moment’s  caprice  and  circumstance  ?  Then 
studies  introduce  a  world  arranged  on  the 
basis  of  eternal  and  general  truth ;  a  world 
where  all  is  measured  and  defined.  Hence 
the  moral :  ignore  and  minimize  the  child’s 
individual  peculiarities,  whims,  and  experi¬ 
ences.  They  are  what  we  need  to  get  away 
from.  They  are  to  be  obscured  or  eliminated. 
As  educators  our  work  is  precisely  to  substi¬ 
tute  for  these  superficial  and  casual  affairs 
stable  and  well-ordered  realities ;  and  these 
are  found  in  studies  and  lessons. 

Subdivide  each  topic  into  studies ;  each 
study  into  lessons ;  each  lesson  into  specific 
facts  and  formulae.  Let  the  child  proceed 
step  by  step  to  master  each  one  of  these  sepa¬ 
rate  parts,  and  at  last  he  will  have  covered 
the  entire  ground.  The  road  which  looks  so 
long  when  viewed  in  its  entirety,  is  easily 
traveled,  considered  as  a  series  of  particular 
steps.  Thus  emphasis  is  put  upon  the  logical 
subdivisions  and  consecutions  of  the  subject- 


The  Child  and  the  Currictilum 


13 


matter.  Problems  of  instruction  are  problems 
of  procuring  texts  giving  logical  parts  and 
sequences,  and  of  presenting  these  portions  in 
class  in  a  similar  definite  and  graded  way. 
Subject-matter  furnishes  the  end,  and  it  deter¬ 
mines  method.  The  child  is  simply  the  imma¬ 
ture  being  who  is  to  be  matured  ;  he  is  the 
superficial  being  who  is  to  be  deepened;  his  is 
narrow  experience  which  is  to  be  widened.  It 
is  his  to  receive,  to  accept.  His  part  is  ful¬ 
filled  when  he  is  ductile  and  docile. 

Not  so,  says  the  other  sect.  The  child  is  the 
starting-point,  the  center,  and  the  end.  His 
development,  his  growth,  is  the  ideal.  It  alone 
furnishes  the  standard.  To  the  growth  of  the 
child  all  studies  are  subservient ;  they  are  in¬ 
struments  valued  as  they  serve  the  needs  of 
growth.  Personality,  character,  is  more  than 
subject-matter.  Not  knowledge  or  informa¬ 
tion,  but  self-realization,  is  the  goal.  To  pos¬ 
sess  all  the  world  of  knowledge  and  lose  one’s 
own  self  is  as  awful  a  fate  in  education  as 
in  religion.  Moreover,  subject-matter  never 
can  be  got  into  the  child  from  without. 
Learning  is  active.  It  involves  reaching  out 
of  the  mind.  It  involves  organic  assimilation 
starting  from  within.  Literally,  we  must  take 
our  stand  with  the  child  and  our  departure  from 
him.  It  is  he  and  not  the  subject-matter  which 


14 


The  Child  and  the  Cnrficulnm 


determines  both  quality  and  quantity  of  learn¬ 
ing. 

The  only  significant  method  is  the  method 
of  the  mind  as  it  reaches  out  and  assimilates. 
Subject-matter  is  but  spiritual  food,  possible 
nutritive  material.  It  cannot  digest  itself;  it 
cannot  of  its  own  accord  turn  into  bone  and 
muscle  and  blood.  The  source  of  whatever  is 
dead,  mechanical,  and  formal  in  schools  is 
found  precisely  in  the  subordination  of  the  life 
and  experience  of  the  child  to  the  curriculum. 
It  is  because  of  this  that  “study”  has  become 
a  synonym  for  what  is  irksome,  and  a  lesson 
identical  with  a  task. 

This  fundamental  opposition  of  child  and 
curriculum  set  up  by  these  two  modes  of  doc¬ 
trine  can  be  duplicated  in  a  series  of  other 
terms.  “  Discipline  ”  is  the  watchword  of  those 
who  magnify  the  course  of  study;  “interest” 
that  of  those  who  blazon  “The  Child”  upon 
their  banner.  The  standpoint  of  the  former  is 
logical ;  that  of  the  latter  psychological.  The 
first  emphasizes  the  necessity  of  adequate  train¬ 
ing  and  scholarship  on  the  part  of  the  teacher ; 
the  latter  that  of  need  of  sympathy  with  the 
child,  and  knowledge  of  his  natural  instincts. 
“  Guidance  and  control  ”  are  the  catchwords  of 
one  school;  “freedom  and  initiative”  of  the 
other.  Law  is  asserted  here  ;  spontaneity  pro- 


The  Child  and  the  Curriculum 


15 


claimed  there.  The  old,  the  conservation  of 
what  has  been  achieved  in  the  pain  and  toil  of 
the  ages,  is  dear  to  the  one ;  the  new,  change, 
progress,  wins  the  affection  of  the  other.  In¬ 
ertness  and  routine,  chaos  and  anarchism,  are 
accusations  bandied  back  and  forth.  Neglect 
of  the  sacred  authority  of  duty  is  charged  by 
one  side,  only  to  be  met  by  counter-charges  of 
suppression  of  individuality  through  tyrannical 
despotism. 

Such  oppositions  are  rarely  carried  to  their 
logical  conclusion.  Common-sense  recoils  at 
the  extreme  character  of  these  results.  They 
are  left  to  theorists,  while  common-sense 
vibrates  back  and  forward  in  a  maze  of  incon¬ 
sistent  compromise.  The  need  of  getting 
theory  and  practical  common-sense  into  closer 
connection  suggests  a  return  to  our  original 
thesis  :  that  we  have  here  conditions  which  are 
necessarily  related  to  each  other  in  the  educa¬ 
tive  process,  since  this  is  precisely  one  of 
interaction  and  adjustment. 

What,  then,  is  the  problem  ?  It  is  just  to 
get  rid  of  the  prejudicial  notion  that  there  is 
some  gap  in  kind  (as  distinct  from  degree) 
between  the  child’s  experience  and  the  various 
forms  of  subject-matter  that  make  up  the  course 
of  study.  From  the  side  of  the  child,  it  is  a 
question  of  seeing  how  his  experience  already 


i6 


The  Child  and  the  Curficttlum 


contains  within  itself  elements  —  facts  and 
truths  —  of  just  the  same  sort  as  those  entering 
into  the  formulated  study;  and,  what  is  of 
more  importance,  of  how  it  contains  within 
itself  the  attitudes,  the  motives,  and  the  inter¬ 
ests  which  have  operated  in  developing  and 
organizing  the  subject-matter  to  the  plane 
which  it  now  occupies.  From  the  side  of  the 
studies,  it  is  a  question  of  interpreting  them  as 
outgrowths  of  forces  operating  in  the  child’s 
life,  and  of  discovering  the  steps  that  inter¬ 
vene  between  the  child’s  present  experience 
and  their  richer  maturity. 

Abandon  the  notion  of  subject-matter  as 
something  fixed  and  ready-made  in  itself,  out¬ 
side  the  child’s  experience ;  cease  thinking  of 
the  child’s  experience  as  also  something  hard 
and  fast ;  see  it  as  something  fluent,  embry¬ 
onic,  vital ;  and  we  realize  that  the  child  and 
the  curriculum  are  simpl)^  two  limits  which 
define  a  single  process.  Just  as  two  points 
define  a  straight  line,  so  the  present  stand¬ 
point  of  the  child  and  the  facts  and  truths  of 
studies  define  instruction.  It  is  continuous 
reconstruction,  moving  from  the  child’s  pres¬ 
ent  experience  out  into  that  represented  by 
the  organized  bodies  of  truth  that  we  call 
studies. 

On  the  face  of  it,  the  various  studies,  arith- 


The  Child  and  the  Cufficulum 


17 


metic,  geography,  language,  botany,  etc.,  are 
themselves  experience — they  are  that  of  the 
race.  They  embody  the  cumulative  outcome 
of  the  efforts,  the  strivings,  and  successes  of 
the  human  race  generation  after  generation. 
They  present  this,  not  as  a  mere  accumulation, 
not  as  a  miscellaneous  heap  of  separate  bits  of 
experience,  but  in  some  organized  and  sys¬ 
tematized  way  —  that  is,  as  reflectively  formu¬ 
lated. 

Hence,  the  facts  and  truths  that  enter  into 
the  child’s  present  experience,  and  those  con¬ 
tained  in  the  subject-matter  of  studies,  are 
the  initial  and  final  terms  of  one  reality.  To 
oppose  one  to  the  other  is  to  oppose  the  in¬ 
fancy  and  maturity  of  the  same  growing  life  ; 
it  is  to  set  the  moving  tendency  and  the  final 
result  of  the  same  process  over  against  each 
other  ;  it  is  to  hold  that  the  nature  and  the 
destiny  of  the  child  war  with  each  other. 

If  such  be  the  case,  the  problem  of  the  rela¬ 
tion  of  the  child  and  the  curriculum  presents 
itself  in  this  guise  :  Of  what  use,  education¬ 
ally  speaking,  is  it  to  be  able  to  see  the  end  in 
the  beginning  ?  How  does  it  assist  us  in 
dealing  with  the  early  stages  of  growth  to  be 
able  to  anticipate  its  later  phases  ?  The  studies, 
as  we  have  agreed,  represent  the  possibilities 
of  development  inherent  in  the  child’s  immedi- 


i8 


The  Child  and  the  Corricultim 


ate  crude  experience.  But,  after  all,  they  are 
not  parts  of  that  present  and  immediate  life. 
Why,  then,  or  how,  make  account  of  them  ? 

Asking  such  a  question  suggests  its  own 
answer.  To  see  the  outcome  is  to  know  in 
what  direction  the  present  experience  is  mov¬ 
ing,  provided  it  move  normally  and  soundly. 
The  far-away  point,  which  is  of  no  significance 
to  us  simply  as  far  away,  becomes  of  huge 
importance  the  moment  we  take  it  as  defining 
a  present  direction  of  movement.  Taken  in 
this  way  it  is  no  remote  and  distant  result  to 
be  achieved,  but  a  guiding  method  in  dealing 
with  the  present.  The  systematized  and  de¬ 
fined  experience  of  the  adult  mind,  in  other 
words,  is  of  value  to  us  in  interpreting  the 
child’s  life  as  it  immediately  shows  itself,  and 
in  passing  on  to  guidance  or  direction. 

Let  us  look  for  a  moment  at  these  two 
ideas  :  interpretation  and  guidance.  The 
child’s  present  experience  is  in  no  way  self- 
explanatory.  It  is  not  final,  but  transitional. 
It  is  nothing  complete  in  itself,  but  just  a  sign 
or  index  of  certain  growth-tendencies.  As 
long  as  we  confine  our  gaze  to  what  the  child 
here  and  now  puts  forth,  we  are  confused  and 
misled.  We  cannot  read  its  meaning.  Ex¬ 
treme  depreciations  of  the  child  morally  and 
intellectually,  and  sentimental  idealizations  of 


The  Child  and  the  Curficnlum 


19 


him,  have  their  root  in  a  common  fallacy. 
Both  spring  from  taking  stages  of  a  growth 
or  movement  as  something  cut  off  and  fixed. 
The  first  fails  to  see  the  promise  contained  in 
feelings  and  deeds  which,  taken  by  them¬ 
selves,  are  unpromising  and  repellant  ;  the 
second  fails  to  see  that  even  the  most  pleas¬ 
ing  and  beautiful  exhibitions  are  but  signs, 
and  that  they  begin  to  spoil  and  rot  the 
moment  they  are  treated  as  achievements. 

What  we  need  is  something  which  will  en¬ 
able  us  to  interpret,  to  appraise,  the  elements  in 
the  child's  present  puttings  forth  and  fallings 
away,  his  exhibitions  of  power  and  weakness, 
in  the  light  of  some  larger  growth-process  in 
which  they  have  their  place.  Only  in  this  way 
can  we  discriminate.  If  we  isolate  the  child’s 
present  inclinations,  purposes,  and  experiences 
from  the  place  they  occupy  and  the  part  they 
have  to  perform  in  a  developing  experience, 
all  stand  upon  the  same  level ;  all  alike  are 
equally  good  and  equally  bad.  But  in  the 
movement  of  life  different  elements  stand  upon 
different  planes  of  value.  Some  of  the  child’s 
deeds  are  symptoms  of  a  waning  tendency; 
they  are  survivals  in  functioning  of  an  organ 
which  has  done  its  part  and  is  passing  out  of 
vital  use.  To  give  positive  attention  to  such 
qualities  is  to  arrest  development  upon  a  lower 


20 


The  Child  and  the  Cufficulnm 


level.  It  is  systematically  to  maintain  a  rudi¬ 
mentary  phase  of  growth.  Other  activities  are 
signs  of  a  culminating  power  and  interest ;  to 
them  applies  the  maxim  of  striking  while  the 
iron  is  hot.  As  regards  them,  it  is  perhaps 
a  matter  of  now  or  never.  Selected,  utilized, 
emphasized,  they  may  mark  a  turning-point  for 
good  in  the  child’s  whole  career  ;  neglected,  an 
opportunity  goes,  never  to  be  recalled.  Other 
acts  and  feelings  are  prophetic  ;  they  represent 
the  dawning  of  flickering  light  that  will  shine 
steadily  only  in  the  far  future.  As  regards 
them  there  is  little  at  present  to  do  but  give 
them  fair  and  full  chance,  waiting  for  the  fu¬ 
ture  for  definite  direction. 

Just  as,  upon  the  whole,  it  was  the  weakness 
of  the  “old  education”  that  it  made  invidious 
comparisons  between  the  immaturity  of  the 
child  and  the  maturity  of  the  adult,  regarding 
the  former  as  something  to  be  got  away  from 
as  soon  as  possible  and  as  much  as  possible ; 
so  it  is  the  danger  of  the  “new  education” 
that  it  regard  the  child’s  present  powers  and 
interests  as  something  finally  significant  in 
themselves.  In  truth,  his  learnings  and  achieve¬ 
ments  are  fluid  and  moving.  They  change 
from  day  to  day  and  from  hour  to  hour. 

It  will  do  harm  if  child-study  leave  in  the 
popular  mind  the  impression  that  a  child  of  a 


The  Child  and  the  Curriculum 


2  I 


given  age  has  a  positive  equipment  of  purposes 
and  interests  to  be  cultivated  just  as  they  stand. 
Interests  in  reality  are  but  attitudes  toward  pos¬ 
sible  experiences ;  they  are  not  achievements  ; 
their  worth  is  in  the  leverage  they  afford,  not 
in  the  accomplishment  they  represent.  To 
take  the  phenomena  presented  at  a  given  age 
as  in  any  way  self-explanatory  or  self-con¬ 
tained  is  inevitably  to  result  in  indulgence 
and  spoiling.  Any  power,  whether  of  child  or 
adult,  is  indulged  when  it  is  taken  on  its  given 
and  present  level  in  consciousness.  Its  genu¬ 
ine  meaning  is  in  the  propulsion  it  affords 
toward  a  higher  level.  It  is  just  something  to 
do  with.  Appealing  to  the  interest  upon  the 
present  plane  means  excitation  ;  it  means  play¬ 
ing  with  a  power  so  as  continually  to  stir  it  up 
without  directing  it  toward  definite  achieve¬ 
ment.  Continuous  initiation,  continuous  start¬ 
ing  of  activities  that  do  not  arrive,  is,  for  all 
practical  purposes,  as  bad  as  the  continual  re¬ 
pression  of  initiative  in  conformity  with  sup¬ 
posed  interests  of  some  more  perfect  thought 
or  will.  It  is  as  if  the  child  were  forever  tast¬ 
ing  and  never  eating ;  always  having  his  palate 
tickled  upon  the  emotional  side,  but  never 
getting  the  organic  satisfaction  that  comes 
only  with  digestion  of  food  and  transforma¬ 
tion  of  it  into  working  power. 


22 


The  Child  and  the  Cufficultim 


As  against  such  a  view,  the  subject-matter 
of  science  and  history  and  art  serves  to  reveal 
the  real  child  to  us.  We  do  not  know  the 
meaning  either  of  his  tendencies  or  of  his  per¬ 
formances  excepting  as  we  take  them  as  ger¬ 
minating  seed,  or  opening  bud,  of  some  fruit 
to  be  borne.  The  whole  world  of  visual 
nature  is  all  too  small  an  answer  to  the  problem 
of  the  meaning  of  the  child’s  instinct  for  light 
and  form.  The  entire  science  of  physics  is 
none  too  much  to  interpret  adequately  to  us 
what  is  involved  in  some  simple  demand  of  the 
child  for  explanation  of  some  casual  change 
that  has  attracted  his  attention.  The  art  of 
Rafael  or  of  Corot  is  none  too  much  to  enable 
us  to  value  the  impulses  stirring  in  the  child 
when  he  draws  and  daubs. 

So  much  for  the  use  of  the  subject-matter  in 
interpretation.  Its  further  employment  in 
direction  or  guidance  is  but  an  expansion  of 
the  same  thought.  To  interpret  the  fact  is  to 
see  it  in  its  vital  movement,  to  see  it  in  its  re¬ 
lation  to  growth.  But  to  view  it  as  a  part  of 
a  normal  growth  is  to  secure  the  basis  for 
guiding  it.  Guidance  is  not  external  imposi¬ 
tion.  It  is  freeing  the  life-process  for  its  own  most 
adequate  fulfilmeiit.  What  was  said  about 
disregard  of  the  child’s  present  experience  be¬ 
cause  of  its  remoteness  from  mature  experi- 


The  Child  and  the  Cufriculum 


23 


ence  ;  and  of  the  sentimental  idealization  of 
the  child’s  naive  caprices  and  performances, 
may  be  repeated  here  with  slightly  altered 
phrase.  There  are  those  who  see  no  alterna¬ 
tive  between  forcing  the  child  from  without,  or 
leaving  him  entirely  alone.  Seeing  no  alter¬ 
native,  some  choose  one  mode,  some  another. 
Both  fall  into  the  same  fundamental  error. 
Both  fail  to  see  that  development  is  a  definite 
process,  having  its  own  law  which  can  be  ful¬ 
filled  only  when  adequate  and  normal  condi¬ 
tions  are  provided.  Really  to  interpret  the 
child’s  present  crude  impulses  in  counting, 
measuring,  and  arranging  things  in  rhythmic 
series,  involves  mathematical  scholarship  — 
a  knowledge  of  the  mathematical  formulae  and 
relations  which  have,  in  the  history  of  the  race, 
grown  out  of  just  such  crude  beginnings.  To 
see  the  whole  history  of  development  which 
intervenes  between  these  two  terms  is  simply 
to  see  what  step  the  child  needs  to  take  just 
here  and  now  ;  to  what  use  he  needs  to  put  his 
blind  impulse  in  order  that  it  may  get  clarity 
and  gain  force. 

If,  once  more,  the  “  old  education  ”  tended 
to  ignore  the  dynamic  quality,  the  developing 
force  inherent  in  the  child’s  present  experi¬ 
ence,  and  therefore  to  assume  that  direction 
and  control  were  just  matters  of  arbitrarily 


24 


The  Child  and  the  Cufficttltim 


putting  the  child  in  a  given  path  and  compel¬ 
ling  him  to  walk  there,  the  “  new  education” 
is  in  danger  of  taking  the  idea  of  development 
in  altogether  too  formal  and  empty  a  way. 
The  child  is  expected  to  “develop”  this  or 
that  fact  or  truth  out  of  his  own  mind.  He  is 
told  to  think. things  out,  or  work  things  out 
for  himself,  without  being  supplied  any  of 
the  environing  conditions  which  are  requisite 
to  start  and  guide  thought.  Nothing  can  be 
developed  from  nothing ;  nothing  but  the 
crude  can  be  developed  out  of  the  crude  — 
and  this  is  what  surely  happens  when  we  throw 
the  child  back  upon  his  achieved  self  as  a 
finality,  and  invite  him  to  spin  new  truths  of 
nature  or  of  conduct  out  of  that.  It  is  cer¬ 
tainly  as  futile  to  expect  a  child  to  evolve  a 
universe  out  of  his  own  mere  mind  as  it  is  for 
a  philosopher  to  attempt  that  task.  Develop¬ 
ment  does  not  mean  just  getting  something 
out  of  the  mind.  It  is  a  development  of  ex¬ 
perience  and  into  experience  that  is  really 
wanted.  And  this  is  impossible  save  as  just 
that  educative  medium  is  provided  which  will 
enable  the  powers  and  interests  that  have  been 
selected  as  valuable  to  function.  They  must 
operate,  and  how  they  operate  will  depend 
almost  entirely  upon  the  stimuli  which  sur¬ 
round  them,  and  the  material  upon  which  they 


The  Child  and  the  Curricultim 


25 


exercise  themselves.  The  problem  of  direction 
is  thus  the  problem  of  selecting  appropriate 
stimuli  for  instincts  and  impulses  which  it  is 
desired  to  employ  in  the  gaining  of  new  expe¬ 
rience.  What  new  experiences  are  desirable, 
and  thus  what  stimuli  are  needed,  it  is  impossi¬ 
ble  to  tell  except  as  there  is  some  comprehen¬ 
sion  of  the  development  which  is  aimed  at  ; 
except,  in  a  word,  as  the  adult  knowledge  is 
drawn  upon  as  revealing  the  possible  career 
open  to  the  child. 

It  may  be  of  use  to  distinguish  and  to  relate 
to  each  other  the  logical  and  the  psychological 
aspects  of  experience — the  former  standing 
for  subject-matter  in  itself,  the  latter  for  it  in 
relation  to  the  child.  A  psychological  state¬ 
ment  of  experience  follows  its  actual  growth ; 
it  is  historic  ;  it  notes  steps  actually  taken,  the 
uncertain  and  tortuous,  as  well  as  the  efficient 
and  successful.  The  logical  point  of  view,  on 
the  other  hand,  assumes  that  the  development 

I 

has  reached  a  certain  positive  stage  of  fulfil¬ 
ment.  It  neglects  the  process  and  considers 
the  outcome.  It  summarizes  and  arranges, 
and  thus  separates  the  achieved  results  from 
the  actual  steps  by  which  they  were  forthcom¬ 
ing  in  the  first  instance.  We  may  compare  the 
difference  between  the  logical  and  the  psycho¬ 
logical  to  the  difference  between  the  notes 


26 


The  Child  and  the  Curriculum 


which  an  explorer  makes  in  a  new  country, 
blazing  a  trail  and  finding  his  way  along  as 
best  he  may,  and  the  finished  map  that  is  con¬ 
structed  after  the  country  has  been  thoroughly 
explored.  The  two  are  mutually  dependent. 
Without  the  more  or  less  accidental  and  devious 
paths  traced  by  the  explorer  there  would  be 
no  facts  which  could  be  utilized  in  the  making 
of  the  complete  and  related  chart.  But  no 
one  would  get  the  benefit  of  the  explorer’s 
trip  if  it  was  not  compared  and  checked  up 
with  similar  wanderings  undertaken  by  others; 
unless  the  new  geographical  facts  learned,  the 
streams  crossed,  the  mountains  climbed,  etc., 
were  viewed,  not  as  mere  incidents  in  the 
journey  of  the  particular  traveler,  but  (quite 
apart  from  the  individual  explorer’s  life)  in 
relation  to  other  similar  facts  already  known. 
The  map  orders  individual  experiences,  connect¬ 
ing  them  with  one  another  irrespective  of  the 
local  and  temporal  circumstances  and  acci¬ 
dents  of  their  original  discovery. 

Of  what  use  is  this  formulated  statement  of 
experience?  Of  what  use  is  the  map? 

Well,  we  may  first  tell  what  the  map  is  not. 
The  map  is  not  a  substitute  for  a  personal 
experience.  The  map  does  not  take  the  place  of 
an  actual  journey.  The  logically  formulated 
material  of  a  science  or  branch  of  learning,  of 


The  Child  and  the  Curriculum 


27 


a  study,  is  no  substitute  for  the  having  of 
individual  experiences.  The  mathematical 
formula  for  a  falling  body  does  not  take 
the  place  of  personal  contact  and  immediate 
individual  experience  with  the  falling  thing. 
But  the  map,  a  summary,  an  arranged  and 
orderly  view  of  previous  experiences,  serves 
as  a  guide  to  future  experience ;  it  gives 
direction ;  it  facilitates  control ;  ‘it  econo¬ 
mizes  effort,  preventing  useless  wandering, 
and  pointing  out  the  paths  which  lead  most 
quickly  and  most  certainly  to  a  desired 
result.  Through  the  map  every  new  trav¬ 
eler  may  get  for  his  own  journey  the  bene¬ 
fits  of  the  results  of  others’  explorations  with¬ 
out  the  waste  of  energy  and  loss  of  time 
involved  in  their  wanderings  —  wanderings 
which  he  himself  would  be  obliged  to  repeat 
were  it  not  for  just  the  assistance  of  the  objec¬ 
tive  and  generalized  record  of  their  perform¬ 
ances.  That  which  we  call  a  science  or  study 
puts  the  net  product  of  past  experience  in  the 
form  which  makes  it  most  available  for  the 
future.  It  represents  a  capitalization  which 
may  at  once  be  turned  to  interest.  It  econo¬ 
mizes  the  workings  of  the  mind  in  every  way. 
Memory  is  less  taxed  because  the  facts  are 
grouped  together  about  some  common  princi¬ 
ple,  instead  of  being  connected  solely  with  the 


28 


The  Child  and  the  Curriculum 


varying  incidents  of  their  original  discovery. 
Observation  is  assisted ;  we  know  what  to  look 
for  and  where  to  look.  It  is  the  difference 
between  looking  for  a  needle  in  a  haystack, 
and  searching  for  a  given  paper  in  a  well- 
arranged  cabinet.  Reasoning  is  directed, 
because  there  is  a  certain  general  path  or  line 
laid  out  along  which  ideas  naturally  march, 
instead  of  moving  from  one  chance  association 
to  another. 

There  is,  then,  nothing  final  about  a  logical 
rendering  of  experience.  Its  value  is  not  con¬ 
tained  in  itself ;  its  significance  is  that  of 
standpoint,  outlook,  method.  It  intervenes 
between  thb  more  casual,  tentative,  and  round¬ 
about  experiences  of  the  past,  and  more  con¬ 
trolled  and  orderly  experiences  of  the  future. 
It  gives  past  experience  in  that  net  form 
which  renders  it  most  available  and  most  sig¬ 
nificant,  most  fecund  for  future  experience. 
The  abstractions,  generalizations,  and  classifi¬ 
cations  which  it  introduces  all  have  prospective 
meaning. 

The  formulated  result  is  then  not  to  be  op¬ 
posed  to  the  process  of  growth.  The  logical 
is  not  set  over  against  the  psychological.  The 
surveyed  and  arranged  result  occupies  a  crit¬ 
ical  position  in  the  process  of  growth.  It 
marks  a  turning-point.  It  shows  how  we  may 


The  Child  and  the  Ctirrictilum 


29 


get  the  benefit  of  past  effort  in  controlling 
future  endeavor.  In  the  largest  sense  the  log¬ 
ical  standpoint  is  itself  psychological ;  it  has 
its  meaning  as  a  point  in  the  development  of 
experience,  and  its  justification  is  in  its  func¬ 
tioning  in  the  future  growth  which  it  insures. 

Hence  the  need  of  reinstating  into  experi¬ 
ence  the  subject-matter  of  the  studies,  or 
branches  of  learning.  It  must  be  restored  to 
the  experience  from  which  it  has  been  ab¬ 
stracted.  It  needs  to  be  psychologized ;  turned 
over,  translated  into  the  immediate  and  indi¬ 
vidual  experiencing  within  which  it  has  its 
origin  and  significance. 

Every  study  or  subject  thus  has  two  as¬ 
pects  :  one  for  the  scientist  as  a  scientist;  the 
other  for  the  teacher  as  a  teacher.  These  two 
aspects  are  in  no  sense  opposed  or  conflicting. 
But  neither  are  they  immediately  identical. 
For  the  scientist,  the  subject-matter  represents 
simply  a  given  body  of  truth  to  be  employed 
in  locating  new  problems,  instituting  new  re¬ 
searches,  and  carrying  them  through  to  a  veri¬ 
fied  outcome.  To  him  the  subject-matter  or 
the  science  is  self-contained.  He  refers  vari¬ 
ous  portions  of  it  to  each  other ;  he  connects 
new  facts  with  it.  He  is  not,  as  a  scientist, 
called  upon  to  travel  outside  its  particular 
bounds  ;  if  he  does,  it  is  only  to  get  more  facts 


30 


The  Child  and  the  Cufficttlum 


of  the  same  general  sort.  The  problem  of 
the  teacher  is  a  different  one.  As  a  teacher 
he  is  not  concerned  with  adding  new  facts  to 
the  science  he  teaches ;  in  propounding  new 
hypotheses  or  in  verifying  them.  He  is  con¬ 
cerned  with  the  subject-matter  of  the  science 
as  representing  a  given  stage  and  phase  of  the  de¬ 
velopment  of  experience.  His  problem  is  that 
of  inducing  a  vital  and  personal  experiencing. 
Hence,  what  concerns  him,  as  teacher,  is  the 
ways  in  which  that  subject  may  become  a  part 
of  experience  ;  what  there  is  in  the  child’s 
present  that  is  usable  with  reference  to  it;  how 
such  elements  are  to  be  used  ;  how  his  own 
knowledge  of  the  subject-matter  may  assist  in 
interpreting  the  child’s  needs  and  doings,  and 
determine  the  medium  in  which  the  child 
should  be  placed  in  order  that  his  growth  may 
be  properly  directed.  He  is  concerned,  not 
with  the  subject-matter  as  such,  but  with  the 
subject-matter  as  a  related  factor  in  a  total 
and  growing  experience.  Thus  to  see  it  is  to 
psychologize  it. 

It  is  the  failure  to  keep  in  mind  the  double  as¬ 
pect  of  subject-matter  which  causes  the  curric¬ 
ulum  and  child  to  be  set  over  against  each  other 
as  described  in  our  early  pages.  The  subject- 
matter,  just  as  it  is  for  the  scientist,  has  no  direct 
relationship  to  the  child’s  present  experience. 


The  Child  and  the  Curricultim 


31 


It  stands  outside  of  it.  The  danger  here  is  not 
a  merely  theoretical  one.  We  are  practically 
threatened  on  all  sides.  Text-book  and  teacher 
vie  with  each  other  in  presenting  to  the  child 
the  subject-matter  as  it  stands  to  the  specialist. 
Such  modification  and  revision  as  it  undergoes 
are  a  mere  elimination  of  certain  scientific  diffi¬ 
culties,  and  the  general  reduction  to  a  lower 
intellectual  level.  The  material  is  not  trans¬ 
lated  into  life-terms,  but  is  directly  offered  as 
a  substitute  for,  or  an  external  annex  to,  the 
child’s  present  life. 

Three  typical  evils  result :  In  the  first  place, 
the  lack  of  any  organic  connection  with  what 
the  child  has  already  seen  and  felt  and  loved 
makes  the  material  purely  formal  and  symbolic. 
There  is  a  sense  in  which  it  is  impossible  to 
value  too  highly  the  formal  and  the  symbolic. 
The  genuine  form,  the  real  symbol,  serve  as 
methods  in  the  holding  and  discovery  of  truth. 
They  are  tools  by  which  the  individual  pushes 
out  most  surely  and  widely  into  unexplored 
areas.  They  are  means  by  which  he  brings 
to  bear  whatever  of  reality  he  has  succeeded 
in  gaining  in  past  searchings.  But  this  hap¬ 
pens  only  when  the  symbol  really  symbol¬ 
izes —  when  it  stands  for  and  sums  up  in  short¬ 
hand  actual  experiences  which  the  individual 
has  already  gone  through.  A  symbol  which  is 


32 


The  Child  and  the  Curricultim 


induced  from  without,  which  has  not  been  led 
up  to  in  preliminary  activities,  is,  as  we  say, 
a  bare  or  mere  symbol ;  it  is  dead  and  barren. 
Now,  any  fact,  whether  of  arithmetic,  or  geog¬ 
raphy,  or  grammar,  which  is  not  led  up  to  and 
into  out  of  something  which  has  previously 
occupied  a  significant  position  in  the  child’s 
life  for  its  own  sake,  is  forced  into  this  posi¬ 
tion.  It  is  not  a  reality,  but  just  the  sign  of  a 
reality  which  might  be  experienced  if  certain 
conditions  were  fulfilled.  But  the  abrupt  pres¬ 
entation  of  the  fact  as  something  known  by 
others,  and  requiring  only  to  be  studied  and 
learned  by  the  child,  rules  out  such  conditions  of 
fulfilment.  It  condemns  the  fact  to  be  a  hiero¬ 
glyph  :  it  would  mean  something  if  one  only 
had  the  key.  The  clue  being  lacking,  it  re¬ 
mains  an  idle  curiosity,  to  fret  and  obstruct  the 
mind,  a  dead  weight  to  burden  it. 

The  second  evil  in  this  external  presentation 
is  lack  of  motivation.  There  are  not  only  no 
facts  or  truths  which  have  been  previously  felt 
as  such  with  which  to  appropriate  and  assimilate 
the  new,  but  there  is  no  craving,  no  need,  no 
demand.  When  the  subject-matter  has  been 
psychologized,  that  is,  viewed  as  an  outgrowth 
of  present  tendencies  and  activities,  it  is  easy 
to  locate  in  the  present  some  obstacle,  intel¬ 
lectual,  practical,  or  ethical,  which  can  be 


The  Child  and  the  Cufficulum 


33 


handled  more  adequately  if  the  truth  in  ques- 
tion  be  mastered.  This  need  supplies  motive 
for  the  learning.  An  end  which  is  the  child’s 
own  carries  him  on  to  possess  the  means  of  its 
accomplishment.  But  when  material  is  directly 
supplied  in  the  form  of  a  lesson  to  be  learned 
as  a  lesson,  the  connecting  links  of  need  and 
aim  are  conspicuous  for  their  absence.  What 
we  mean  by  the  mechanical  and  dead  in  instruc¬ 
tion  is  a  result  of  this  lack  of  motivation. 
The  organic  and  vital  mean  interaction  —  they 
mean  play  of  mental  demand  and  material 
supply. 

The  third  evil  is  that  even  the  most  scientific 
matter,  arranged  in  most  logical  fashion,  loses 
this  quality,  when  presented  in  external,  ready¬ 
made  fashion,  by  the  time  it  gets  to  the  child. 
It  has  to  undergo  some  modification  in  order 
to  shut  out  some  phases  too  hard  to  grasp,  and 
to  reduce  some  of  the  attendant  difficulties. 
What  happens  ?  Those  things  which  are  most 
significant  to  the  scientific  man,  and  most 
valuable  in  the  logic  of  actual  inquiry  and 
classification,  drop  out.  The  really  thought- 
provoking  character  is  obscured,  and  the 
organizing  function  disappears.  Or,  as  we 
commonly  say,  the  child’s  reasoning  powers, 
the  faculty  of  abstraction  and  generalization, 
are  not  adequately  developed.  So  the  subject- 


34 


The  Child  and  the  Curriculum 


matter  is  evacuated  of  its  logical  value,  and, 
though  it  is  what  it  is  only  from  the  logical 
standpoint,  is  presented  as  stuff  only  for 
“  memory.”  This  is  the  contradiction  :  the  child 
gets  the  advantage  neither  of  the  adult  logical 
formulation,  nor  of  his  own  native  competencies 
of  apprehension  and  response.  Hence  the 
logic  of  the  child  is  hampered  and  mortified, 
and  we  are  almost  fortunate  if  he  does  not  get 
actual  non-science,  flat  and  commonplace 
residua  of  what  was  gaining  scientific  vitality 
a  generation  or  two  ago  —  degenerate  reminis¬ 
cence  of  what  someone  else  once  formulated 
on  the  basis  of  the  experience  that  some  further 
person  had,  once  upon  a  time,  experienced. 

The  train  of  evils  does  not  cease.  It  is  all 
too  common  for  opposed  erroneous  theories  to 
play  straight  into  each  other’s  hands.  Psycho¬ 
logical  considerations  may  be  slurred  or  shoved 
one  side ;  they  cannot  be  crowded  out.  Put 
out  of  the  door,  they  come  back  through  the 
window.  Somehow  and  somewhere  motive 
must  be  appealed  to,  connection  must  be 
established  between  the  mind  and  its  material. 
There  is  no  question  of  getting  along  without 
this  bond  of  connection ;  the  only  question  is 
whether  it  be  such  as  grows  out  of  the  material 
itself  in  relation  to  the  mind,  or  be  imported 
and  hitched  on  from  some  outside  source.  If 


The  Child  and  the  Ctifficulum 


35 


the  subject-matter  of  the  lessons  be  such  as  to 
have  an  appropriate  place  within  the  expanding 
consciousness  of  the  child,  if  it  grows  out  of 
his  own  past  doings,  thinkings,  and  sufferings, 
and  grows  into  application  in  further  achieve¬ 
ments  and  receptivities,  then  no  device  or  trick 
of  method  has  to  be  resorted  to  in  order  to 
enlist  “interest.”  The  psychologized  is  of 
interest — that  is,  it  is  placed  in  the  whole  of 
conscious  life  so  that  it  shares  the  worth  of 
that  life.  But  the  externally  presented 
material,  that,  conceived  and  generated  in 
standpoints  and  attitudes  remote  from  the  child, 
and  developed  in  motives  alien  to  him,  has  no 
such  place  of  its  own.  Hence  the  recourse 
to  adventitious  leverage  to  push  it  in,  to 
factitious  drill  to  drive  it  in,  to  artificial  bribe 
to  lure  it  in. 

Three  aspects  of  this  recourse  to  outside 
ways  for  giving  the  subject-matter  some  psy¬ 
chological  meaning  may  be  worth  mentioning. 
Familiarity  breeds  contempt,  but  it  also  breeds 
something  like  affection.  We  get  used  to  the 
chains  we  wear,  and  we  miss  them  when 
removed.  ’Tis  an  old  story  that  through 
custom  we  finally  embrace  what  at  first  wore 
a  hideous  mien.  Unpleasant,  because  mean¬ 
ingless,  activities  may  get  agreeable  if  long 
enough  persisted  in.  It  is  possible  for  the  mind 


36 


The  Child  and  the  Curriculum 


to  develop  interest  m  a  routine  or  mechanical  proce¬ 
dure,  if  conditions  are  continually  supplied  which 
demafid  that  mode  of  operation  and  preclude  any 
other  sort.  I  frequently  hear  dulling  devices 
and  empty  exercises  defended  and  extolled 
because  “the  children  take  such  an  ‘interest’ 
in  them.”  Yes,  that  is  the  worst  of  it ;  the 
mind,  shut  out  from  worthy  employ  and  miss¬ 
ing  the  taste  of  adequate  performance,  comes 
down  to  the  level  of  that  which  is  left  to  it  to 
know  and  do,  and  perforce  takes  an  interest 
in  a  cabined  and  cramped  experience.  To  find 
satisfaction  in  its  own  exercise  is  the  normal 
law  of  mind,  and  if  large  and  meaningful  busi¬ 
ness  for  the  mind  be  denied,  it  tries  to  content 
itself  with  the  formal  movements  that  remain 
to  it  —  and  too  often  succeeds,  save  in  those 
cases  of  more  intense  activity  which  cannot 
accommodate  themselves,  and  that  make  up 
the  unruly  and  declassi  of  our  school  product. 
An  interest  in  the  formal  apprehension  of  sym¬ 
bols  and  in  their  memorized  reproduction 
becomes  in  many  pupils  a  substitute  for  the 
original  and  vital  interest  in  reality ;  and  all 
because,  the  subject-matter  of  the  course  of 
study  being  out  of  relation  to  the  concrete 
mind  of  the  individual,  some  substitute  bond 
to  hold  it  in  some  kind  of  working  relation  to 
the  mind  must  be  discovered  and  elaborated. 


The  Child  and  the  Cttfriculum 


37 


The  second  substitute  for  living  motivation 
in  the  subject-matter  is  that  of  contrast-effects  ; 
the  material  of  the  lesson  is  rendered  interest¬ 
ing,  if  not  in  itself,  at  least  in  contrast  with 
some  alternative  experience.  To  learn  the 
lesson  is  more  interesting  than  to  take  a  scold¬ 
ing,  be  held  up  to  general  ridicule,  stay  after 
school,  receive  degradingly  low  marks,  or  fail 
to  be  promoted.  And  very  much  of  what 
goes  by  the  name  of  “discipline,”  and  prides 
itself  upon  opposing  the  doctrines  of  a  soft 
pedagogy  and  upon  upholding  the  banner  of 
effort  and  duty,  is  nothing  more  or  less  than 
just  this  appeal  to  “interest”  in  its  obverse 
aspect  —  to  fear,  to  dislike  of  various  kinds  of 
physical,  social,  and  personal  pain.  The  sub¬ 
ject-matter  does  not  appeal ;  it  cannot  appeal ; 
it  lacks  origin  and  bearing  in  a  growing  experi¬ 
ence.  So  the  appeal  is  to  the  thousand  and 
one  outside  and  irrelevant  agencies  which  may 
serve  to  throw,  by  sheer  rebuff  and  rebound, 
the  mind  back  upon  the  material  from  which  it 
is  constantly  wandering. 

Human  nature  being  what  it  is,  however,  it 
tends  to  seek  its  motivation  in  the  agree¬ 
able  rather  than  in  the  disagreeable,  in  direct 
pleasure  rather  than  in  alternative  pain.  And 
so  has  come  up  the  modern  theory  and  prac¬ 
tice  of  the  “interesting,”  in  the  false  sense  of 


38 


The  Child  and  the  Cufficultim 


that  term.  The  material  is  still  left ;  so  far  as 
its  own  characteristics  are  concerned,  just  ma¬ 
terial  externally  selected  and  formulated.  It 
is  still  just  so  much  geography  and  arithmetic 
and  grammar  study;  not  so  much  potentiality 
of  child-experience  with  regard  to  language, 
earth,  and  numbered  and  measured  reality. 
Hence  the  difficulty  of  bringing  the  mind  to 
bear  upon  it ;  hence  its  repulsiveness ;  the 
tendency  for  attention  to  wander;  for  other 
acts  and  images  to  crowd  in  and  expel  the 
lesson.  The  legitimate  way  out  is  to  trans¬ 
form  the  material ;  to  psychologize  it — that  is, 
once  more,  to  take  it  and  to  develop  it  within 
the  range  and  scope  of  the  child’s  life.  But  it  is 
easier  and  simpler  to  leave  it  as  it  is,  and  then 
by  trick  of  method  to  arouse  interest,  to  make 
it  interesting ;  to  cover  it  with  sugar-coating ; 
to  conceal  its  barrenness  by  intermediate  and 
unrelated  material ;  and  finally,  as  it  were,  to 
get  the  child  to  swallow  and  digest  the  unpal¬ 
atable  morsel  while  he  is  enjoying  tasting 
something  quite  different.  But  alas  for  the 
analogy!  Mental  assimilation  is  a  matter  of 
consciousness;  and  if  the  attention  has  not 
been  playing  upon  the  actual  material,  that  has 
not  been  apprehended,  nor  worked  into  faculty. 

How,  then,  stands  the  case  of  Child  vs.  Cur- 
irculum  ?  What  shall  the  verdict  be  ?  The 


The  Child  and  the  Curriculum 


39 


radical  fallacy  in  the  original  pleadings  with 
which  we  set  out  is  the  supposition  that  we 
have  no  choice  save  either  to  leave  the  child  to 
his  own  unguided  spontaneity  or  to  inspire 
direction  upon  him  from  without.  Action  is 
response  ;  it  is  adaptation,  adjustment.  There  is 
no  such  thing  as  sheer  self-activity  possible  — 
because  all  activity  takes  place  in  a  medium,  in 
a  situation,  and  with  reference  to  its  conditions. 
But,  again,  no  such  thing  as  imposition  of  truth 
from  without,  as  insertion  of  truth  from  with¬ 
out,  is  possible.  All  depends  upon  the  activity 
which  the  mind  itself  undergoes  in  responding 
to  what  is  presented  from  without.  Now,  the 
value  of  the  formulated  wealth  of  knowledge 
that  makes  up  the  course  of  study  is  that  it  may 
enable  the  educator  to  determine  the  environment 
of  the  child,  and  thus  by  indirection  to  direct. 
Its  primary  value,  its  primary  indication,  is 
for  the  teacher,  not  for  the  child.  It  says  to 
the  teacher:  Such  and  such  are  the  capacities, 
the  fulfilments,  in  truth  and  beauty  and  beha¬ 
vior,  open  to  these  children.  Now  see  to  it 
that  day  by  day  the  conditions  are  such  that 
their  own  activities  move  inevitably  in  this 
direction,  toward  such  culmination  of  them¬ 
selves.  Let  the  child’s  nature  fulfil  its  own 
destiny,  revealed  to  you  in  whatever  of  science 


40 


The  Child  and  the  Currictilum 


and  art  and  industry  the  world  now  holds  as 
its  own. 

The  case  is  of  Child.  It  is  his  present 
powers  which  are  to  assert  themselves ;  his 
present  capacities  which  are  to  be  exercised ; 
his  present  attitudes  which  are  to  be  realized. 
But  save  as  the  teacher  knows,  knows  wisely 
and  thoroughly,  the  race-experience  which  is 
embodied  in  that  thing  we  call  the  Curriculum, 
the  teacher  knows  neither  what  the  present 
power,  capacity,  or  attitude  is,  nor  yet  how 
it  is  to  be  asserted,  exercised,  and  realized. 


V  k-'tiS~-~~-'ZZ  ''C~  V -Si,  ,;?r, 

M  Jw  •*■  ^  'r  '"■v„  'ii  ^  ,' - 


«•  tia  f  •  V  -y^Vtt  .ft J  '*■'‘<1''  i  -^'^■'  *  V  ^^~ii 


.  V  ^  vT 


^;.'i^|^l  fl—A  ,,  I-' 


— — .S-'-  ,  -TT'.'--.-  » 

r 


<r^&  s'  V>.  vT  .■>  „  t  cLi  '♦'-*^'0'^!t.  ■^  ^''?  " »  S 


.  “■  ■  *A;=:^S#--i:»''';kis: 


V, 


‘  'LC-  I^  ■*  S.  ^  v“  hS.’^ 

/^‘ a^  V  ^ V  r-^  .  ^rSv*=.- 


^  -li,  *> 


